git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
	"brian m . carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
	Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] log,diff-tree: add --combined-all-names option
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 14:10:26 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABPp-BHyLFNcdh+=hf=R5xhUoNAQHPophxgc5e2HRqgeTU4e8Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqimxvny6s.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 12:25 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I think "copy from" and "rename from" should be relatively
> > straightforward.  However, in a combined diff, we could have both a
> > modified status, a renamed status, and a copied status, meaning that
> > we'll need an array of both similarity and dissimilarity indexes...and
> > trying to present that to the user in a way that makes sense seems
> > like a lost cause to me.  Does anyone else know how to represent that?
> >  I'm inclined to just leave it out.
> >
> > Also, I'm afraid "copy to" and "rename to" could be confusing if both
> > appeared, since there's only one "to" path.  If there is both a copy
> > and a rename involved relative to different parents, should these be
> > coalesced into a "copy/rename to" line?
>
> There are three possible labels (i.e. 'in-place modification',
> 'rename from elsewhere' and 'copy from elsewhere'), and you can say
> "this commit created file F by renaming from X (or by copying X)"
> only when you know path F did not exist _immediately before_ this
> commit.  The distinction between rename and copy is whether the path
> X remains in the resulting commit (i.e. if there is no X, the commit
> created path F by moving X; if there is X, the commit copied the
> contents of X into a new path F).
>
> So telling renames and copies apart is probably straight-forward (if
> you have sufficient information---I am not sure if you do in this
> codepath offhand); as long as you know what pathname each preimage
> (i.e. parent of the perge) tree had and if that pathname is missing
> in the postimage (luckily there is only one---the merge result), it
> was renamed, and otherwise it was copied.

We have change status, M, C, A, R, D, etc.  So, R vs. C tells us
renamed or copied.  We also have the original filename.

> But telling in-place modification and other two might be
> trickier. In one parent path F may be missing but in the other
> parent path F may exist, and the result of the merge is made by
> merging the contents of path X in the first parent and the contents
> of path F in the second parent.  From the view of the transition
> between the first parent to the merge result, we moved the path X to
> path F and made some modifications (i.e. renamed).  From the view of
> the transition from the other branch, we kept the contents in path F
> during the transition and there is no renames or copies involved.
>
> Actually what I had in mind when I mentioned the extended headers
> the first time in this discussion was that we would have "rename
> from", "copy from", etc. separately for each parent, as the contents
> may have come from different paths in these parents.  And that was
> where my earlier "... might only become waste of the screen real
> estate" comes from.

I think I'm with you on everything you said here, but perhaps not
since I can't see an answer to my question.  Maybe an example will
help:

Let's say we have an octopus merge.  Parent 1 had file F.  Parent 2
had file X.  Parent 3 had file Y.  The octopus has two files: F' and
X, with F' being very similar to F, X, and Y.

There's no "modified from" header; it's not needed (unless we want to
add a new kind of noise header?)
We could emit a "copied from X" header, due to parent 2.
We could emit a "renamed from Y" header, due to parent 3.

Now, the question: In addition to the two "from" headers, how many
"to" headers do we emit?  In particular, do we emit both a "copied to
F" and a "renamed to F" header, or just a combined "renamed/copied to
F" header?  I'm inclined to go with the latter, to avoid giving the
idea that there are multiple targets, but maybe folks expect there to
be one "rename to" and "copy to" for each "rename from" or "copy from"
that appeared.

> So, again, do not spend too much effort to emit these textual info
> that can be easily seen with the N+1 plus/minus header lines.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-07 22:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-24 16:46 [PATCH] log,diff-tree: add --combined-with-paths options for merges with renames Elijah Newren
2019-01-25  2:19 ` brian m. carlson
2019-01-25 16:27   ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 14:45 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-01-25 16:30   ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 16:54 ` [PATCH v2] " Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 17:40   ` Derrick Stolee
2019-01-25 17:52     ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 19:51       ` Eric Sunshine
2019-01-26 22:07         ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-27  1:52       ` brian m. carlson
2019-01-26 22:18   ` [PATCH v3] log,diff-tree: add --combined-all-names option Elijah Newren
2019-02-04 20:07     ` [PATCH v4] " Elijah Newren
2019-02-04 21:20       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-05 15:51         ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-05 20:39           ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 19:50             ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-07 20:25               ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 22:10                 ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2019-02-07 23:31                   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 23:48                     ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-05  9:48       ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-02-05 15:54         ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-05 18:04           ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 22:28       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-07 23:48         ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-08  1:12       ` [PATCH v5 0/2] add --combined-all-paths option to log and diff-tree Elijah Newren
2019-02-08  1:12         ` [PATCH v5 1/2] log,diff-tree: add --combined-all-paths option Elijah Newren
2019-02-08  4:00           ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-08  6:52             ` Elijah Newren
2019-02-08 17:50               ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-08  1:12         ` [PATCH v5 2/2] squash! " Elijah Newren
2019-02-08  4:14           ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-08  6:48             ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 19:29 ` [PATCH] log,diff-tree: add --combined-with-paths options for merges with renames Junio C Hamano
2019-01-25 20:04   ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-25 22:21     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-01-26 22:12       ` Elijah Newren
2019-01-28  0:19         ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CABPp-BHyLFNcdh+=hf=R5xhUoNAQHPophxgc5e2HRqgeTU4e8Q@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
    --cc=stolee@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).